Clbull@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 3 months agoBlizzard locks you out of account if you don't agree to new terms; no ownership, forced arbitrationyoutu.beexternal-linkmessage-square114fedilinkarrow-up1909arrow-down115
arrow-up1894arrow-down1external-linkBlizzard locks you out of account if you don't agree to new terms; no ownership, forced arbitrationyoutu.beClbull@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 3 months agomessage-square114fedilink
minus-squareTelodzrum@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3arrow-down15·3 months agoIt’s just a term of a contract. It’s only “forced” insofar as both parties agree to require it in order to settle disputes.
minus-squareIrateAnteater@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up20arrow-down1·3 months agoWhich shouldn’t be allowed in relation to consumer goods and services.
minus-squareTelodzrum@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down19·3 months agoMeh, arbitration is cheaper and faster than actual litigation. I see clear advantages for both parties.
minus-squareBezier@suppo.filinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up19arrow-down1·edit-23 months agoBut also obvious disadvantages to the customer in cases like this. Why should the customer not have a right to refuse?
It’s just a term of a contract. It’s only “forced” insofar as both parties agree to require it in order to settle disputes.
Which shouldn’t be allowed in relation to consumer goods and services.
Meh, arbitration is cheaper and faster than actual litigation. I see clear advantages for both parties.
But also obvious disadvantages to the customer in cases like this. Why should the customer not have a right to refuse?